So I , for one, was very excited to see that we are finally getting Dynamic Maps in this rendition. To see destructible environments, and to have the map look completely different at the end of the match than it does at the start. I think this was the only logical next step in the CoD progression. It is hard to get tired of a map when it plays differently every time.

So I got my wish.. anyone else excited about this news? Anything you would like to see added into the series that you feel has been lacking in the past?

I'm excited, too. I'm glad that they maps will have destructible environment. That means there will be lots of places for me to camp. If the enemies blows up the wall then I'll take advantage of the rubble and camp on it.

Just hope it is fully dynamic, including weather and lighting such as time of day changes and wind/rain/dust/snow on the correct maps of course. Destructable is good, but has been done in BF. Trully dynamic including what was mentioned above would be even better.

Do you even know what dynamic "weather" actually is? Dynamic maps and dynamic weather are 2 very completely different things. I doubt the weather will be completely different every single game. I doubt that one game it will be sunny and the next one will be raining on the same exact map.

My sense is, it is not much more than....shoot a restraint element to release some logs, rocks, water or destroy a wall to block a path. There may only be one or two of these elements per map and the location of the trap is fixed. So this element is little more than an exploding vehicle or barrel type trap that can block a run route on a map or perhaps open a route.

My logic is that;

- same game, apart from graphic and lighting effects, for both 360 and x1. So core mechanics has to fit 512k 360 ram limit.

- 360 and x1 folks will play in same populations so makeup matchmaking volumes. Again exposing 512k ram limit.

- both IW and 3arc have a proven track record of over selling features onto which the game reporting community latch and "pump". The result is simple features get promoted as more than they really offer. Examples include lavagate, branching story lines, single play "command" features. All good ideas but poor in execution and over hyped as game changing features.

I am a bit concerned about the dynamic maps. I don't really like a lot of interference with gun battles that are hard to predict (ex. earthquakes). These types of elements often create a "host migration" type of affect for me as I am likely to be killed after it interferes. There should be a decent buffer between the warning and the event if it is something players don't trigger themselves to allow you to adjust your scenario to work accordingly. Not just a matter of dueling it out in a gunfight and an earthquake starts that throws your aim off and the enemies aim on target.

Player triggered traps are something else I am leary of as it can be as strong as a killstreak. Dropping a truck load of rolling logs through the middle of the map on command seems a bit broken. Seems as stong as an air strike to me to allow such a thing, I can only imagine a race to control the traps in each map with triggered traps.

My idea of a good dynamic map progression is the moving through to newer areas of the map being opened as you progress and closed off, but again this is simply something that BF has done already. With such new hardware the map size should be a complete city starting at the center that branches out in a circle. The player actions and streaks used would determine how it branches out from that circle to the edges of the city and end the game. So you would start at the center with 3 possible areas to progress from there. Action A triggers you to move to zone A in the next progression where there are 2 more possible areas thereafter. This would then place you into the last area. With this system, one map could possibly have 10 routes to completion. I think it's also important that CoD INNOVATE their franchise and not IMITATE BF series.

I think player triggered traps is the way to go with CODG. It would require team work and time to get to these and use them successfully. At like 3 minutes into the game you can trigger one event then 3 minutes later you can trigger another.

I am curious at best to see the full gameplay, however I am definately not getting my hopes up and can not believe how many people are happy with what they saw yesterday. (not neccesarily you guys) I was not impressed. The slide is just a cheap rip off of the dolphin dive, which doesn't surprise me due to the fact that the game's lead developer just came to IW from 3arc, the mantle and lean are pointless and have already been done and the graphics really didn't look that much better. I really hope the closer we get to launch this game develops into something much more or I'm afraid my cod day are over. Not being a smartass, and I realize know one really cares, I just needed a place to vent. Thanks.

You won't see a huge leap in graphic. The only thing that will change right now is how much can be seen on a screen at one time. Shadows and lighting effects are what is really going to come to life. The 360 is what is really lacking in. I would expect that after the developer get used to developing on these new consoles graphics will become almost life like.

Your right, I remember when the 360 came out the graphics were obviously better but it took them a year or two to really sink they're teeth in. I probably just got my hopes a little too high. Seriously though, I would gladly give up graphics for a better matchmaking system, which with more xbox live servers, I'm sure they can deliver. I was really dissapointed on how Vollker revealed that the engine is not new but tweaked, I was under the impression that the next engine would be new. Any insight?

You won't see a huge leap in graphic. The only thing that will change right now is how much can be seen on a screen at one time. Shadows and lighting effects are what is really going to come to life. The 360 is what is really lacking in. I would expect that after the developer get used to developing on these new consoles graphics will become almost life like.

Actually... it will be a signaficant improvement in graphics. FOV will be greater but so will macro details. They are able to add several layers of texture. You combine this with the vastly improved lighting engines and we are in for a treat.

The key is if the devs have had enough time to learn it... Ghosts II in 2015 will make this title look so poor.

You won't see a huge leap in graphic. The only thing that will change right now is how much can be seen on a screen at one time. Shadows and lighting effects are what is really going to come to life. The 360 is what is really lacking in. I would expect that after the developer get used to developing on these new consoles graphics will become almost life like.

Actually... it will be a signaficant improvement in graphics. FOV will be greater but so will macro details. They are able to add several layers of texture. You combine this with the vastly improved lighting engines and we are in for a treat.

The key is if the devs have had enough time to learn it... Ghosts II in 2015 will make this title look so poor.

Its not new engine tough. They still just modified the old one. For the dynamic maps, has anyone seen what they are actually, it could be just few doors breaking or trees falling all we know. Its improvement for CoD for sure but this engine is severely lacking on graphics and capability of the other next gen engines. After all its basis is 14 years old.

You won't see a huge leap in graphic. The only thing that will change right now is how much can be seen on a screen at one time. Shadows and lighting effects are what is really going to come to life. The 360 is what is really lacking in. I would expect that after the developer get used to developing on these new consoles graphics will become almost life like.

Actually... it will be a signaficant improvement in graphics. FOV will be greater but so will macro details. They are able to add several layers of texture. You combine this with the vastly improved lighting engines and we are in for a treat.

The key is if the devs have had enough time to learn it... Ghosts II in 2015 will make this title look so poor.

Its not new engine tough. They still just modified the old one. For the dynamic maps, has anyone seen what they are actually, it could be just few doors breaking or trees falling all we know. Its improvement for CoD for sure but this engine is severely lacking on graphics and capability of the other next gen engines. After all its basis is 14 years old.

There's a thread about the engine... don't feel like re-writing about it. But if you think this engine resembles COD4... you're cuckoo.

I've seen as much as you have regarding how the dynamic maps function. I love the concept. How well it's implemented, time will tell.

I'm not saying it looks like CoD 4 but the engine is still only modification of id Tech 3 from 1999. They simply don't have time to develop engine from ground up. The old basis of the engine is bottleneck for them to add some features like more advanced physics and graphical high tech.

They did improve lighting and shadows, that improve how the game look a lot. Also with new consoles they can move to high res textures (from 720p to 1080p). And they have decent AA that softens the corners but it won't be able to compete with graphics nor physics.

The improvement for sure is great as we move to new console era but there is no doubt other games in next gen will look a lot better. Frostbite 3, CryEngine 3, Unreal Engine 3 and id Tech 6 among others will be vastly superior.

From the footage we have already seen there is some problems with the Call of Duty: Ghosts lightning.

I'm not saying it looks like CoD 4 but the engine is still only modification of id Tech 3 from 1999. They simply don't have time to develop engine from ground up. The old basis of the engine is bottleneck for them to add some features like more advanced physics and graphical high tech.

They did improve lighting and shadows, that improve how the game look a lot. Also with new consoles they can move to high res textures (from 720p to 1080p). And they have decent AA that softens the corners but it won't be able to compete with graphics nor physics.

The improvement for sure is great as we move to new console era but there is no doubt other games in next gen will look a lot better. Frostbite 3, CryEngine 3, Unreal Engine 3 and id Tech 6 among others will be vastly superior.

From the footage we have already seen there is some problems with the Call of Duty: Ghosts lightning.

Seriously... there's a good thread about the engine. Let's talk that there.

I think alot of the dynamic will be stuff that we've already seen done in 3arc games , something iw havent really ever done in there games,

I cant remember what interview it was on but i do remember an example given of a game mode where a satelite crashes somewhere on a map and both teams have to reach it first as an example of what they are aiming for dynamic wise.

I hope we get something interesting one of my biggest issues with cod maps in general is the speed at which everyone masters them and you then get bored with the same old all the time, id like to see some mixing up where routes open and close randomly for example

I think alot of the dynamic will be stuff that we've already seen done in 3arc games , something iw havent really ever done in there games,

I cant remember what interview it was on but i do remember an example given of a game mode where a satelite crashes somewhere on a map and both teams have to reach it first as an example of what they are aiming for dynamic wise.

I hope we get something interesting one of my biggest issues with cod maps in general is the speed at which everyone masters them and you then get bored with the same old all the time, id like to see some mixing up where routes open and close randomly for example

I didn't hear about the Satelite thing, but I do recall them talking about the changing of the routes in the game. Either player generated or done by the game itself. I think one of the examples that was shown were some longs rolling down a hill to potentially block a path.

I didn't hear about the Satelite thing, but I do recall them talking about the changing of the routes in the game. Either player generated or done by the game itself. I think one of the examples that was shown were some longs rolling down a hill to potentially block a path.

lol i just was watching that trying to find where i saw the satelite example given..

I do think this whole dynamic thing is more iw catching up to what 3arc have done in the past with maps but adding their own spin onto it more..

Far as im concerned with a map anything that mixes up routes so we dont just constantly playb the same old very time would be awesome